Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 1/29/2025 at 7:52 PM, Codaxx said:

Banks seems to be slipping a bit. Sad to say, but how he measures will probably decide it. People throwing out he is 1 inch from the prototype, not enough length, might be a guard. I hate to see this stuff happen to him, but it is a bit funny considering people yammering about Turntine being a guard in the recruit chat. 

Expand  

Him slipping now doesn't mean he'll keep falling. Pretty much every year draft analysts go through the same process with prospects. During the season they focus on the player's film and on-field play, then as we get to Senior Bowl and combine season prospects start to get underrated or overrated depending on measurables, and finally a couple weeks after the combine the analysts go back to rewatching the film and guys with good film move back up. This happens pretty much every cycle and it was always going to happen to Banks since he's smaller than your normal 1st round OT. As long as Banks' height or wingspan are below average but not drastically low I don't think his stock will change a ton from where it was towards the end of the season.

The other thing that will help him is there aren't many other highly-rated OTs. Will Campbell is the only other OT thought to be a worth a top 10-15 pick. Personally, I don't think Campbell's play was all that great and he seems overrated to me. Either way, there's a good chance Banks goes top 10 or top 15 off teams reaching for need alone.

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Posted
  On 1/29/2025 at 7:52 PM, Codaxx said:

Banks seems to be slipping a bit. Sad to say, but how he measures will probably decide it. People throwing out he is 1 inch from the prototype, not enough length, might be a guard. I hate to see this stuff happen to him, but it is a bit funny considering people yammering about Turntine being a guard in the recruit chat. 

Expand  

The problem with the recruiting projections is that too many idiots, paid or otherwise, incorporate their NFL projection into what a program should want as a college player. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
  On 1/29/2025 at 9:28 PM, Burt Macklin said:

Him slipping now doesn't mean he'll keep falling. Pretty much every year draft analysts go through the same process with prospects. During the season they focus on the player's film and on-field play, then as we get to Senior Bowl and combine season prospects start to get underrated or overrated depending on measurables, and finally a couple weeks after the combine the analysts go back to rewatching the film and guys with good film move back up. This happens pretty much every cycle and it was always going to happen to Banks since he's smaller than your normal 1st round OT. As long as Banks' height or wingspan are below average but not drastically low I don't think his stock will change a ton from where it was towards the end of the season.

The other thing that will help him is there aren't many other highly-rated OTs. Will Campbell is the only other OT thought to be a worth a top 10-15 pick. Personally, I don't think Campbell's play was all that great and he seems overrated to me. Either way, there's a good chance Banks goes top 10 or top 15 off teams reaching for need alone.

Expand  

 

  On 1/29/2025 at 9:38 PM, kevwun said:

On the plus side, he will end up playing for a better team.

Expand  

could be front office smokescreens, too.

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 1/29/2025 at 7:52 PM, Codaxx said:

Banks seems to be slipping a bit. Sad to say, but how he measures will probably decide it. People throwing out he is 1 inch from the prototype, not enough length, might be a guard. I hate to see this stuff happen to him, but it is a bit funny considering people yammering about Turntine being a guard in the recruit chat. 

Expand  

This is generally a strategy that you see around consensus top players at premier positions with some mundane flaw. Teams start throwing this stuff out to everyone who will listen and try to create a narrative to get one of these guys to fall in the draft to them. It usually doesn't work, but every now and then it does. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

Banks' draft range in the mocks changed because he was likely over-slotted, and DJ finally got around to posting his, and the rest of the industry adjusted since he's the most connected and should have the most accurate mock at any given time 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
  On 1/29/2025 at 11:08 PM, Vertigo said:

This is generally a strategy that you see around consensus top players at premier positions with some mundane flaw. Teams start throwing this stuff out to everyone who will listen and try to create a narrative to get one of these guys to fall in the draft to them. It usually doesn't work, but every now and then it does. 

Expand  

I think it is a bit of both. Scouts tend to over think these things.  Can I draft a LT that is ~6’3” top 10? Does his height make him a RT/Guard? I know his 3 years of tape says I should, but he is not the prototype. The underwear Olympics are real. There always seems to be a great player that falls and a jag (for the draft) that rises. Banks may drop to 15-20 area and a guy like Alfred Collins may move up early-mid second round. I always find the give and take between measurables and film to be interesting this time of year. 

  • Like 1
Posted

Shilo might do a bit better as a safety, except he probably tackles like his old man. 

Seems like a classic Cowboys second round pick right now.

Posted

The fascination with a tackle having to be 6’5”+ has also seemed stupid to me. Teams are too on finding Tony Bosseli unicorns instead of guys who can actually play.

Measurables have never made a player (see Mario Williams). What they do on the field and in practice should matter 95%.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

It's a hit rate thing, trying to make drafting more scientific and less art

Teams have various "measurables" thresholds at different positions that have to be met to spend a certain value of draft pick. Arm length for OTs, hand size for QBs, max throwing velocity for QBs, arm length for outside corner, short shuttle for ILB, short shuttle for S, three cone for edge, etc

They have data that shows players who meet these thresholds have a higher rate of "hitting" than those who don't, so if you filter out the players who don't meet those thresholds, theoretically your drafting should improve. Combine the improved hit rate with focusing on the more valuable positions early, and you should be doing much better than how teams were drafting in the 1990s, at the very least, although if every team is doing it to some degree, is there really an edge? Another way to think about it is these measurables are rare in humans, so draft the players with the rare measurables earlier, and then there should be more players available later in the draft with more common measurables to choose from, and missing later in the draft hurts you less 

Some teams are all-in on this, while others are pretty lax about it 

Regarding Banks, I don't see why he can't be Rashawn Slater, who's been a good NFL LT when healthy, and if he were in this draft with the knowledge of how he's played in the NFL (ignoring injuries), he'd probably go top five 

Another thing to consider is interior OL (which apparently some teams view Banks and even Campbell as) are becoming more valuable because there are more dominant DLs and more difficult to deal with interior stunts than ever before, and the contracts for the top guards tracks with that 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
  On 1/30/2025 at 2:05 PM, Fud said:

It's a hit rate thing, trying to make drafting more scientific and less art

Teams have various "measurables" thresholds at different positions that have to be met to spend a certain value of draft pick. Arm length for OTs, hand size for QBs, max throwing velocity for QBs, arm length for outside corner, short shuttle for ILB, short shuttle for S, three cone for edge, etc

They have data that shows players who meet these thresholds have a higher rate of "hitting" than those who don't, so if you filter out the players who don't meet those thresholds, theoretically your drafting should improve. Combine the improved hit rate with focusing on the more valuable positions early, and you should be doing much better than how teams were drafting in the 1990s, at the very least, although if every team is doing it to some degree, is there really an edge? Another way to think about it is these measurables are rare in humans, so draft the players with the rare measurables earlier, and then there should be more players available later in the draft with more common measurables to choose from, and missing later in the draft hurts you less 

Some teams are all-in on this, while others are pretty lax about it 

Regarding Banks, I don't see why he can't be Rashawn Slater, who's been a good NFL LT when healthy, and if he were in this draft with the knowledge of how he's played in the NFL (ignoring injuries), he'd probably go top five 

Another thing to consider is interior OL (which apparently some teams view Banks and even Campbell as) are becoming more valuable because there are more dominant DLs and more difficult to deal with interior stunts than ever before, and the contracts for the top guards tracks with that 

Expand  

Banks should have a floor, no matter how stupid GMs get about height. I believe I heard 4 sacks in ~1600 pass blocking plays.  I think he can play LT, but even if you have doubts. He can slide to RT, either guard spot, or play LT in a pinch. Huge value to having that type of versatility. 

Posted (edited)
  On 1/30/2025 at 4:00 AM, Fastbreak said:

The fascination with a tackle having to be 6’5”+ has also seemed stupid to me. Teams are too on finding Tony Bosseli unicorns instead of guys who can actually play.

Measurables have never made a player (see Mario Williams). What they do on the field and in practice should matter 95%.

Expand  

While I agree with this to an extent, there is no way you can rely 95% on on-field play and essentially ignore measurables. There are some very key measurements that correlate extremely strongly with success at the next level. For instance, if you're drafting an edge rusher 3 cone times are extremely important. There was a study done a couple years back and it was about 85% of the top 15 or 20 edge rushers in the league had a 3 cone time under 7.10. So there is definitely a good reason for having certain measurable cutoffs at key positions, especially for first or second round picks.  There's also just certain guys who have the baseline athleticism to let their other skills dominate in college, but they then fall below that baseline athleticism requirement in the NFL, so you can't just go off film.  Not to mention you'd miss out on a ton of high-ceiling prospects if you only go off of film. 

  On 1/30/2025 at 2:05 PM, Fud said:

It's a hit rate thing, trying to make drafting more scientific and less art

Teams have various "measurables" thresholds at different positions that have to be met to spend a certain value of draft pick. Arm length for OTs, hand size for QBs, max throwing velocity for QBs, arm length for outside corner, short shuttle for ILB, short shuttle for S, three cone for edge, etc

They have data that shows players who meet these thresholds have a higher rate of "hitting" than those who don't, so if you filter out the players who don't meet those thresholds, theoretically your drafting should improve. Combine the improved hit rate with focusing on the more valuable positions early, and you should be doing much better than how teams were drafting in the 1990s, at the very least, although if every team is doing it to some degree, is there really an edge? Another way to think about it is these measurables are rare in humans, so draft the players with the rare measurables earlier, and then there should be more players available later in the draft with more common measurables to choose from, and missing later in the draft hurts you less 

Some teams are all-in on this, while others are pretty lax about it 

Regarding Banks, I don't see why he can't be Rashawn Slater, who's been a good NFL LT when healthy, and if he were in this draft with the knowledge of how he's played in the NFL (ignoring injuries), he'd probably go top five 

Another thing to consider is interior OL (which apparently some teams view Banks and even Campbell as) are becoming more valuable because there are more dominant DLs and more difficult to deal with interior stunts than ever before, and the contracts for the top guards tracks with that 

Expand  

Agree with this. His size/wingspan may keep him from being a dominant LT in the NFL, but he still has a ceiling of being a top 5-10 LT in the NFL, which is extremely valuable. And his floor is very high because he can move inside to G if OT isn't working and still become a Pro Bowl G, a la Cosmi. I really can't see him falling outside the top 15 in this draft, unless he's bottom 5 or 10 percentile for some of the size/reach measurements. 

Edited by Burt Macklin
Posted
  On 1/29/2025 at 9:38 PM, closetojumping said:

The problem with the recruiting projections is that too many idiots, paid or otherwise, incorporate their NFL projection into what a program should want as a college player. 

Expand  

Absolutely. Players are being marginalized more and more in recruiting rankings because they don't project well to the NFL. There is too much emphasis on NFL measurables, prototype sizes, and future draft stock rather than focusing on what makes a player successful in college football. Shifting the focus from college impact to speculative pro projection has become more common and problematic with recruiting services.

The obsession has distorted the recruiting process. Highly rated recruits with high NFL ceilings are prioritized by "idiots" over players who possess the skills and instincts necessary to immediately contribute in college. It's across every position. Offensive linemen who excel in zone-heavy spread schemes in high school are devalued in favor of massive tackles with long-term NFL potential. Cornerbacks who would dominate in a college zone system are downgraded because they don’t fit the NFL’s man-heavy defenses. This misalignment has created a disconnect between recruiting rankings and actual success on the field in college.

Texas still brings in plenty of highly ranked recruits, but our staff has at least shown a clear willingness to prioritize players who fit the system and culture—rather than just chasing NFL prototypes that the idiots obsess over. Sarkisian is proving that you can develop NFL talent while still focusing on what wins in college.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
  On 1/30/2025 at 1:53 PM, texifornia said:

https://x.com/_RyanFowler_/status/1884690968747602201?t=uKwSOzOaQNSAeZrfIWTVng&s=19

You'll have to click through for video - Barryn Sorrell going 2 for 3 against Emory Jones

Expand  

I love that it's the bull rush that is fucking Jones up, because he's worrying too much about getting worked around the edge. Sorrell has got the "game within the game" part of playing DE down cold.   

Posted
  On 1/31/2025 at 5:29 AM, westexhorn said:

Is Barryn Sorrell the only guy participating in these draft bowls? (I looked at rosters of both Senior bowl and East West)

Expand  

Yes, the others dropped out, along with players from other teams who made the semis 

Posted

The 2025 NFL Draft depth by position

The scale: great, good, average, below average, scarce

  • QUARTERBACK: BELOW AVERAGE
  • RUNNING BACK: GOOD
  • WIDE RECEIVER: GOOD
  • TIGHT END: GREAT
  • OFFENSIVE TACKLE: GOOD
  • INTERIOR OFFENSIVE LINE: SCARCE
  • INTERIOR DEFENDER: GREAT
  • EDGE DEFENDER: GOOD
  • LINEBACKER: SCARCE
  • CORNERBACK: GREAT
  • SAFETY: GREAT

Article link:

https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2025-nfl-draft-strongest-weakest-position-groups

 

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 1/31/2025 at 4:09 PM, LTtxfan said:

The 2025 NFL Draft depth by position

The scale: great, good, average, below average, scarce

  • QUARTERBACK: BELOW AVERAGE
  • RUNNING BACK: GOOD
  • WIDE RECEIVER: GOOD
  • TIGHT END: GREAT
  • OFFENSIVE TACKLE: GOOD
  • INTERIOR OFFENSIVE LINE: SCARCE
  • INTERIOR DEFENDER: GREAT
  • EDGE DEFENDER: GOOD
  • LINEBACKER: SCARCE
  • CORNERBACK: GREAT
  • SAFETY: GREAT

Article link:

https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2025-nfl-draft-strongest-weakest-position-groups

 

Expand  

This is a horrible write up. It includes Nussmeier at QB who’s not even declaring and mentions Isaiah Bond as a possible top 5 WR. This has to be a recycled article from this summer. 

Posted

There's so many draft twitter accounts at the senior bowl that there's at least one person vouching for every player at the practices. Kind of a funny dynamic. Not everyone can have a good day. With a few exceptions, I'm mostly sticking to what DJ and Brugler say

For instance, there's a ton of people talking up Jaxson Dart. On yesterday's podcast, DJ said something like "not the best QB group, no one is really standing out, Dart looks fine". Also, as Nate Tice likes to point out, almost all offensive players from that system who get drafted high end up busting 

Posted

I hate this mock because it has Golden going to the chefs: https://www.on3.com/pro/news/2025-nfl-draft-trade-new-no-1-pick-highlight-cbs-sports-updated-mock-shedeur-sanders-abdul-carter/

good for Golden but bad for the NFL:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
  On 1/31/2025 at 4:09 PM, LTtxfan said:

The 2025 NFL Draft depth by position

The scale: great, good, average, below average, scarce

  • QUARTERBACK: BELOW AVERAGE
  • RUNNING BACK: GOOD
  • WIDE RECEIVER: GOOD
  • TIGHT END: GREAT
  • OFFENSIVE TACKLE: GOOD
  • INTERIOR OFFENSIVE LINE: SCARCE
  • INTERIOR DEFENDER: GREAT
  • EDGE DEFENDER: GOOD
  • LINEBACKER: SCARCE
  • CORNERBACK: GREAT
  • SAFETY: GREAT

Article link:

https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2025-nfl-draft-strongest-weakest-position-groups

 

Expand  

I'm sorry but this RB class is great too.  Might not be 3 super elite guys like Jeanty, but they go 15 deep or more of day 1/2 draft picks if they can.

 

Posted (edited)
  On 1/31/2025 at 6:19 PM, The Dog said:

I hate this mock because it has Golden going to the chefs: https://www.on3.com/pro/news/2025-nfl-draft-trade-new-no-1-pick-highlight-cbs-sports-updated-mock-shedeur-sanders-abdul-carter/

good for Golden but bad for the NFL:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Expand  

Mahomes throwing to 2 first round Texas receivers would be something Sark would probably mention every other sentence to wr recruits.

Edited by kevwun
  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Posted
  On 1/31/2025 at 6:19 PM, The Dog said:

I hate this mock because it has Golden going to the chefs: https://www.on3.com/pro/news/2025-nfl-draft-trade-new-no-1-pick-highlight-cbs-sports-updated-mock-shedeur-sanders-abdul-carter/

good for Golden but bad for the NFL:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Expand  

I'd rather have Banks fall into KC's lap.

Posted
  On 1/31/2025 at 6:19 PM, The Dog said:

I hate this mock because it has Golden going to the chefs: https://www.on3.com/pro/news/2025-nfl-draft-trade-new-no-1-pick-highlight-cbs-sports-updated-mock-shedeur-sanders-abdul-carter/

good for Golden but bad for the NFL:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Expand  

They’ll draft a WR in the first with Rice coming back and Worthy emerging? 

Posted

Brugler thinks after the top five or so guys, the next 15 could go in any order without anyone really blinking, and then the 21-50 are similarly fluid (I think DJ said somewhere that 20-60 are much closer than normal, which echoes that)

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
  On 1/31/2025 at 11:55 PM, Fud said:

Brugler thinks after the top five or so guys, the next 15 could go in any order without anyone really blinking, and then the 21-50 are similarly fluid (I think DJ said somewhere that 20-60 are much closer than normal, which echoes that)

Expand  

Based on your comment above #20 thru #60 offer simular value... so are they all likely 2nd Rd grade type players??

Compared to last year, are there less players with a 1st Rd grade for 2025 NFL Draft ??

 

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 2/1/2025 at 12:08 AM, LTtxfan said:

Based on your comment above #20 thru #60 offer simular value... so are they all likely 2nd Rd grade type players??

Compared to last year, are there less players with a 1st Rd grade for 2025 NFL Draft ??

 

Expand  

I think so 

  • Like 1
Posted

Surprised Michigan is on the list...

IMG_20250202_103412.jpg.48176afdb310ed2e7bcb6f266539c9a7.jpg

  • Georgia
  • Michigan
  • Ohio St
  • Ole Miss
  • Oregon
  • Texas

Texas is a strong place to finish.

All-American cornerback Jahdae Barron (17th) leads an extensive group of Horns headed to the NFL. Left tackle Kelvin Banks Jr. (31st) is a highly respected prospect as well.

The next wave begins with receivers Matthew Golden (46th) and Isaiah Bond (52nd), though offensive tackle Cam Williams (65th) may surpass them. Defensive tackle Alfred Collins (84th), tight end Gunnar Helm (88th), safety Andrew Mukuba (98th) and quarterback Quinn Ewers (102nd) grade out as hovering in the Day 2 range.

Along with center Jake Majors (135th), offensive guard Hayden Conner, edge-rusher Barryn Sorrell, defensive tackle Vernon Broughton and linebacker David Gbenda are on the radar.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10152342-college-football-teams-needing-to-replace-the-most-nfl-talent-in-2025

Posted
  On 2/3/2025 at 4:02 PM, TonyTexas said:

Here’s Zierlein’s mock draft 1.0. I think he’s pretty good. He watches a ton of tape. 
https://www.nfl.com/news/lance-zierlein-2025-nfl-mock-draft-1-0-giants-land-travis-hunter-bengals-add-wr-for-joe-burrow

Expand  

He has Banks at 10, Golden at 21 and Barron at 24. 

Cowboys taking Walter Nolan, Texans taking Egbuka. 
 

He also has Will Campbell going #4, which is absolutely insane to me. He’s nowhere near as good of a prospect as the OTs who’ve gone top 5 in recent drafts. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...